JONATHAN PETER WARNETT v. CORPORATION LINK LTD AND OTHERS

JONATHAN PETER WARNETT v. CORPORATION LINK LTD AND OTHERS

Default judgment against the 3rd defendant is set aside ex debito justitiae because service was improperly effected; no conditions are imposed because defect arose from plaintiffs' solicitors' conduct not the defendant's; there was no material non-disclosure to the ex parte judge that would have altered the grant of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
JONATHAN PETER WARNETT v. CORPORATION LINK LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Jonathan Peter Warnett; 1st Defendant: Corporation Link Limited; 2nd Defendant: Allied View Development Limited; 3rd Defendant: Dexin MKTG Co. Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 August 2009
Case Number
HCA2698/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Fraud/recovery With Mareva Injunction / Interlocutory Applications to Set Aside Default Judgment and to Discharge/vary Mareva Injunction
Outcome
Default judgment against the 3rd defendant set aside; Mareva injunction against the 3rd defendant not discharged but varied.
Legal Topics
Mareva Injunction, Setting Aside Default Judgment, Service of Process, Ex Parte Non Disclosure, Variation of Freezing Order, Security for Judgment
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Injunctions Fraud Company Law Banking Mareva Injunction Setting Aside Default Judgment Service of Process +3 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jonathan Peter Warnett

Plaintiff

Corporation Link Limited

1st Defendant

Allied View Development Limited

2nd Defendant

Dexin MKTG Co. Limited

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Fraud/recovery With Mareva Injunction / Interlocutory Applications to Set Aside Default Judgment and to Discharge/vary Mareva Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether default judgment obtained by improper service should be set aside
  2. 2 Whether conditions should be imposed when setting aside an irregular default judgment
  3. 3 Whether there was material non-disclosure to the ex parte judge in the Mareva application

Ratio Decidendi

Default judgment against the 3rd defendant is set aside ex debito justitiae because service was improperly effected; no conditions are imposed because defect arose from plaintiffs' solicitors' conduct not the defendant's; there was no material non-disclosure to the ex parte judge that would have altered the grant of the Mareva injunction; the Mareva injunction is not discharged but its cap is varied to reflect funds recouped (revised claim US$256,670) and Part D is varied to permit the 3rd defendant HK$15,000 per week for ordinary business expenses and a lump sum HK$200,000 for legal costs, with the order to cease if the 3rd defendant provides security of US$256,670 into court.

Court Disposition

Default judgment against the 3rd defendant set aside; Mareva injunction against the 3rd defendant not discharged but varied.

Orders

  • Default judgment against the 3rd defendant (Dexin MKTG Co. Limited) is set aside.
  • No conditions are imposed on setting aside the default judgment.